Lexploria

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

SECOND CHAMBER

Application No. 15154/89

Marion Baumgartner

against

Austria

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 16 February 1993)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

PART I: STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

PART II: SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to the application introduced under

Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human

Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Marion Baumgartner against Austria

on 23 May 1989. It was registered on 21 June 1989 under file

No. 15154/89.

The applicant was represented by Mr. K. Lichtl, a lawyer

practising in Linz.

The Government of Austria were represented by their Agent,

Ambassador H. Türk, Head of the International Law Department at the

Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

2. On 1 April 1992 the Commission (Second Chamber) declared the

application admissible. It then proceeded to carry out its task

under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:

"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to

it:

a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake

together with the representatives of the parties an

examination of the petition and, if need be, an

investigation, for the effective conduct of which the

States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities,

after an exchange of views with the Commission;

b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of

the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly

settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human

Rights as defined in this Convention."

3. The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly

settlement of the case and on 16 February 1993 it adopted this Report,

which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is

confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.

The following members were present when the Report was adopted:

MM. S. TRECHSEL, President of the Second Chamber

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H. G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

F. MARTINEZ

J.-C. GEUS

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

4. The applicant is an Austrian national and resident at Hörsching

in Austria. She was born out of wedlock in April 1983. In May 1983

Mr. Z., who had already one child born in wedlock in 1963 and another

child born out of wedlock in 1976, recognised the paternity as regards

the applicant. Mr. Z. died intestate on 1 February 1988.

5. In subsequent succession proceedings, the Austrian courts

rejected the applicant's acceptance of succession on the ground that

there was an intestate succession and the legitimate child had stated

his acceptance of succession with limited liability. Under S. 754

para. 2 of the Austrian Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch; in the

version in force at the relevant time), in case of intestate

succession, the legitimate child, having accepted succession, had

precedence over an illegitimate child.

6. The applicant complained that, as a result of the application of

S. 754 para. 2 of the Civil Code, she could not claim a right to

intestate succession after her father's death on the sole ground of her

birth out of wedlock. The applicant invoked Article 14 of the

Convention, in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

7. On 1 January 1991 the Austrian Act on the Reform of the Law on

Succession (Erbrechtsänderungsgesetz) of 1989 entered into force,

repealing S. 754 of the Austrian Civil Code.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

8. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application,

the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view

to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with

Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to

submit any proposals they wished to make.

9. In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary,

acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to

explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.

10. By letters of 22 and 27 January 1993 the parties submitted the

following agreement reached between them:

"Statements of the parties with a view to a friendly settlement

With reference to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the European

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,

the parties in the proceedings concerning Application No. 15154/89,

lodged by Miss Marion Baumgartner, declare with a view to a friendly

settlement, reached with assistance of the European Commission of Human

Rights, as follows:

1. The Government of the Republic of Austria will pay to the

applicant a sum amounting to altogether AS 359,187 as

compensation in respect of any possible claims relating to the

present application. This sum includes AS 59,187 in respect of

counsel's fees and expenses incurred in the domestic proceedings

and the proceedings before the Commission.

This amount will be paid to the applicant's representative

Mr. K. Lichtl in Linz.

2. The applicant declares her application settled.

3. The applicant waives any further claims against the

Republic of Austria relating to the present application."

"Erklärungen der Parteien zur gütlichen Regelung

In der Individualbeschwerde Nr. 15154/89 des Fräulein Marion

Baumgartner verständigen sich die Parteien unter Bezugnahme auf

Artikel 28 Abs. 1 b der Europäischen Konvention zum Schutze der

Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten und unter Mitwirkung der

Europäischen Kommission für Menschenrechte auf die nachstehende

gütliche Regelung:

1. Die österreichische Regierung zahlt der Beschwerdeführerin

als Ausgleich für sämtliche etwaige Ansprüche im Zusammenhang mit

der vorliegenden Individualbeschwerde einen Gesamtbetrag von

AS 359.187. Dieser Betrag umfaßt AS 59.187 hinsichtlich der

Gebühren und Auslagen, die im Rahmen der nationalen

Gerichtsverfahren und des Verfahrens vor der Kommission

entstanden sind.

Dieser Betrag wird an den Verfahrensbevollmächtigten der

Beschwerdeführerin Herrn K. Lichtl in Linz überwiesen.

2. Die Beschwerdeführerin erklärt ihre oben genannte

Beschwerde als erledigt.

3. Die Beschwerdeführerin verzichtet auf die Geltendmachung

allfälliger weiterer Forderungen gegen die Republik Österreich

im Zusammenhang mit dem der Beschwerde zugrundeliegenden

Sachverhalt."

11. At its session on 16 February 1993, the Commission noted that the

parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.

It further noted that S. 754 of the Austrian Civil Code, which formed

the basis of the decision complained of, has been repeated by the Act

on the Reform of the Law on Succession. The Commission concluded,

having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the

friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of

respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.

12. For these reasons, the Commission adopted this Report.

Secretary to the Second Chamber President of the Second Chamber

(K. ROGGE) (S. TRECHSEL)

Menu

BAUMGARTNER v. AUSTRIA

BAUMGARTNER v. AUSTRIA

LEXI